In many sporting activities there is a risk of injury when a player hits his/her head. In particular, when there is a direct hit on the top of a player's head, the player could suffer a wide range of injuries, from a concussion to permanent paralysis. Some athletes who have sustained direct hits to the top of their head have ended up as paraplegics and quadriplegics.
In view of the risk of injury a number of head gear devices have been suggested to help reduce the risk of spinal injury. For example, U.S. Pat. No. 5,715,541 issued Feb. 10, 1998 to Landau shows a device which includes a sleeveless jacket worn about the user's torso, a head shield shaped to cover the user's head and rigid supports extending from the jacket to the head shield. Another head gear arrangement is shown in U.S. Pat. Nos. 5,261,125 and 5,581,820 issued Nov. 16, 1993 and Dec. 10, 1996, respectively, and both issued to Cartwright et al. These patents show a helmet connected to an arm which in turn is attached to a vest worn about the torso.
Alternatively a number of protective head gear devices have been designed primary for use in football. For example U.S. Pat. No. 5,581,816 issued on Dec. 10, 1996 to Davis shows a football-type helmet attached to shoulder pads. The shoulder pads have tracks attached thereto and side connections which are attached to the helmet run in the tracks. Somewhat similarly, U.S. Pat. No. 5,517,699 issued May 21, 1996 to Abraham shows a football-type helmet adapted to provide protection from spinal injuries. Abraham shows a protective hood with rigid side supports that is designed to fit over a helmet and is hingeably attached at the side to the shoulder pad. U.S. Pat. No. 5,444,870 issued August 1995 to Pinsen shows a helmet and shoulder pad combination that includes spaced apart inner and outer helmet portions with a plurality of springs therebetween. A generally concentric guide having outer and inner portions is attached to the shoulder pads and an inner element attached to the helmet is positioned between outer and inner portions. U.S. Pat. No. 5,371,905 issued Dec. 13, 1994 to Keim shows a somewhat different device. Keim shows a helmet which is attached to shoulder pads with a fluid dampening mechanism or a shock absorber. The fluid dampening mechanism has limits at either end to limit the hyper-flexion and hyper-extension. All of these devices have attachments or devices attached to a football type helmet which directly restrict the movement of the helmet.
Other devices have been suggested such as head gear with inflatable bags or head gear with gas chambers therein. For example, the two Rush III, U.S. Pat. No. 5,390,36, issued Feb. 21, 1995 and U.S. Pat. No. 5,287,562 issued February 1994 which show two embodiments of helmets designed to protect spinal injuries. In the one embodiment there is provided an inflatable bag that is triggered by a predetermined force on the crown of the helmet. In a second embodiment there are a plurality of cylinders that are molded into the outside of the helmet. A piston is positioned inside the cylinder and is attached to a generally rigid ring like member that in the retracted position is positioned around the bottom of the helmet. The cylinders are connected to a gas chamber so that when the helmet is hit with a predetermined force the pistons move downwardly until the ring engages the shoulders or shoulder pads of the user. Somewhat similarly Archer shows an enclosed helmet with an inflatable air bag.
Alternative devices show shoulder pads that have attachments for restricting the movement of the helmet downwardly. For example U.S. Pat. No. 5,404,590 issued Apr. 11, 1995 to Monica, Jr. is directed to a restraining collar that extends upwardly from shoulder pads to restrict the movement of a helmet. Another example is U.S. Pat. No. 5,493,736 issued Feb. 27, 1996 to Allison which is directed to a helmet with protrusions extending outwardly therefrom and corresponding posts extending upwardly from the shoulder pad so that the downward motion of the helmet is restricted by the protrusions engaging the posts.
None of these devices appear to be generally used by amateur or professional athletes. In particular none of these devices appear to be used by hockey players. Some of these devices are complex devices that would be costly to manufacture. Further, many of the devices include interactive components that are proximate to the athlete's face. Others would restrict the rotational movement of the athlete's head. Still others include chemicals for inflating air bags and the like.
Accordingly, it would be advantageous to provide a protective head gear that, while it protects the head when hit on the top of the head, allows for rotational movement of the athlete's head. Further, it would be advantageous to provide head gear that minimizes the risk of spinal injury while minimally changing the protective gear currently being worn. Still further it would be advantageous to provide a protective head gear that is generally open and that can easily be disengaged such that when an athlete is not in play such as between periods or during a penalty the athlete can move the head gear so that he/she can freely move their head.